MB3-03201

MB3-03201

The RAD confirmed the RPD's finding that the Appellant was a US permanent resident at the time of the RPD hearing, accepted the new evidence but afforded greater weight to official US documentation over the Appellant's testimony, applied correctness to legal questions and reasonableness to credibility findings, and concluded the Appellant was excluded under Section 1E of the 1951 Convention and therefore is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
MB3-03201
Parties
Appellant / Person Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX; Intervening Party / Respondent: Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Appeal Decision (refugee Appeal Division Reviewing Refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; determination of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed
Legal Topics
Exclusion Clause (1951 Convention), Permanent Resident Status, Credibility Assessment, Standard of Review, Admissibility of New Evidence, Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Exclusion Clause (1951 Convention) Permanent Resident Status Credibility Assessment Standard of Review Admissibility of New Evidence +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Subject of the Appeal

Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Intervening Party / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Appeal Decision (refugee Appeal Division Reviewing Refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant was excluded from refugee protection under Section 1E of the 1951 Refugee Convention because he was a US permanent resident at the time of the RPD hearing
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in finding the Appellant was a US permanent resident
  3. 3 Whether new evidence submitted by the Appellant and the Minister should be admitted

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD's finding that the Appellant was a US permanent resident at the time of the RPD hearing, accepted the new evidence but afforded greater weight to official US documentation over the Appellant's testimony, applied correctness to legal questions and reasonableness to credibility findings, and concluded the Appellant was excluded under Section 1E of the 1951 Convention and therefore is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; determination of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed

Orders

  • The Refugee Appeal Division confirms the RPD decision that the Appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection and dismisses the appeal.